Binance launches its first voting campaign, selecting two tokens from BANANAS31, BID, Broccoli (F3b and CZ'S Dog versions), KOMA, SIREN, Mubarak, TUT, and WHY to go live. I think this kind of activity design can only exist on second tier exchanges rather than exchanges like Binance that speak for their strength, and can only further lower their expectations for listing. Gradually depleting users' enthusiasm and confidence from ALpha to the voting process, ultimately leading to excessive consumption of expectations. Firstly, some tokens quickly take the lead due to centralized voting or project campaigning, which can leave other users feeling powerless. The votes of individual investors seem insignificant compared to the strong resources, traffic, and communities. The expectation of fair participation may be exhausted in the middle or even early stages of voting, and users gradually shift from active participation to passive observation. Community traffic projects have better marketing popularity than technology projects. Secondly, the diversity of candidate projects may overdraw consumers' expectations for quality in advance through voting progress. The list includes both functional tokens such as BID and Meme tokens such as BANANAS31 and mubarak. If during the voting process, the community tends to choose projects with high popularity rather than high value - such as Mubarak leading due to the CZ effect - consumers will gradually realize that the tokens launched may be "traffic driven" rather than "strength driven". Once this trend becomes apparent in the progress, users' expectations for Binance to screen out high-quality projects will be weakened, and they may even feel disappointed before the results are announced. Sometimes, wanting to reflect the so-called community and fairness is actually unfair to some projects, such as the popularity of Mubarak ➕ The familiar image of the new IP has also been lowered in expectations due to such behavior. Thirdly, real-time updates on voting progress may consume consumers' expected investment returns through short-term fluctuations. When people participate in voting, they often hope that the tokens they support can bring profits after going online. However, if the progress shows that certain tokens are leading due to speculation, but then fluctuate due to changes in market sentiment or buying behavior, users may perceive speculative risks in advance. This uncertainty will make them lower their expectations for returns before the voting ends, just waiting for the Sell news. Finally, the voting progress may consume consumers' trust expectations in advance through repeated brand image manipulation. As a leading platform, Binance has high expectations from users for its professionalism and reliability. This kind of activity will make people question whether Binance is using the activity to "play with traffic" rather than adhering to value orientation. This cognition is constantly strengthened during the voting period, and the expectation of brand authority is gradually consumed. Even before the end of the event, users have already shaken their positioning. Overall, from the perspective of consuming expectations through early voting progress, Binance's voting and listing activities may gradually erode consumers' expectations in terms of fairness, project quality, investment return, and brand trust. The transparency of the voting process was originally a highlight, but it is also a blow to the value of Binance's listing, more like a downgrade of consumption due to economic downturn. Consumers' expectations may be running low before the finish line. @cz_binance @heyibinance